The Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to allow the federal government to continue quickly deporting some migrants to countries other than their homelands while a legal battle over the policy continues.
The Justice Department filed an emergency application on Sept. 24 after a lower court ruling imposed additional requirements on third-country deportations. The case is Department of Homeland Security v. D.V.D., according to the Supreme Court docket.
The Trump administration says third-country removals are used when migrants cannot be quickly returned to their home countries. Some countries refuse to take back their citizens, particularly those with serious criminal records. In other cases, migrants cannot be returned because they could face persecution.
The dispute centers on how much notice DHS must give migrants before sending them to another country and what opportunity they must have to raise fears of persecution or torture.
Under DHS guidance issued in March 2025 and reaffirmed in July, migrants may be removed without additional procedures when the State Department considers a receiving country’s assurances credible. In other cases, DHS generally waits at least 24 hours after providing notice.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit ruled on Sept. 18 that migrants must receive effective notice and a meaningful opportunity to raise claims that they could face persecution or torture before a third-country removal. The court largely affirmed an earlier judgment from U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy that struck down the DHS guidance. The court’s opinion said the guidance violated federal law by allowing removals without those protections.
Murphy’s earlier preliminary injunction required DHS to provide written notice identifying the country where a migrant would be sent. It also provided at least 10 days to raise a fear of torture and 15 days to try to reopen immigration proceedings.
Solicitor General D. John Sauer asked the Supreme Court to step in, arguing that the restrictions are disrupting deportation operations and diplomatic arrangements with foreign governments.
Sauer said third-country removals require negotiations with governments that are often reluctant to accept people who are not their citizens. The process can also require travel documents and significant manpower to arrange deportation flights.
The administration said the lower court order forced DHS to cancel a flight that was scheduled to remove migrants with drug and assault offenses on their records. Sauer argued that disrupting planned removals can require additional negotiations with receiving countries.
The government also warned that limiting third-country removals could result in some migrants being released into the United States. Under previous Supreme Court rulings, migrants cannot be detained indefinitely on immigration charges when removal cannot be carried out.
Sauer told the court that the administration has used third-country removals for thousands of migrants and has thousands more it wants to remove under the policy.
Attorneys challenging the policy do not dispute that the government can deport a removable noncitizen to a willing third country. They argue that migrants must first have an opportunity to show that they could face persecution or torture there.
The dispute has reached the Supreme Court before. The high court previously blocked lower court orders restricting the administration’s third-country removal efforts.
The latest application was submitted to Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who handles emergency matters from the 1st Circuit. Sauer asked Jackson to refer the request to the full court if she does not grant the administration’s request herself.
Jackson has directed the challengers to respond by 4 p.m. EDT on Sept. 28, according to the Supreme Court docket.